Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mormon church backing gay rights laws
WiredPRNews.com ^ | 2009-11-11

Posted on 11/11/2009 1:51:21 PM PST by kingattax

Gay rights legislation in Salt Lake City receives its first ever endorsement by the Mormon church.

Salt Lake City, Utah (WiredPRNews.com) - The passage of gay rights legislation in Salt Lake City, Utah was supported for the first time by the Mormon church. As reported by the Associated Press (AP), the church announced its support of laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in housing and employment prior to a vote on the legislation Tuesday.

Michael Otterson, the director of public affairs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is quoted by the AP as stating of the measure, “The church supports these ordinances because they are fair and reasonable and do not do violence to the institution of marriage.”

Brandie Balken, gay rights advocacy group Equality Utah director, is further quoted in the report as stating of the action, “What happened here tonight I do believe is a historic event…I think it establishes that we can stand together on common ground that we don’t have to agree on everything, but there are lot of things that we can work on and be allies.”


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; ldschurch; prop8; slc
another wink and a nod to depravity.
1 posted on 11/11/2009 1:51:21 PM PST by kingattax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Hmmm, this from a church that in some sects believe in polygamy?


2 posted on 11/11/2009 2:13:41 PM PST by el_texicano (Liberals, Socialist, DemocRATS, all touchy, feely, mind numbed robots, useless idiots all!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: el_texicano

The mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has disavowed polygamy for over a century.

To imply that “some sects believe in polygamy” is not unlike implying that all Baptists practice snake-handling and arsenic-drinking. Yes, extremely small enclaves of individuals who claim similar descent practice such heterodox acts, but they have been completely estranged from the mainstream church for generations.


3 posted on 11/11/2009 2:31:36 PM PST by I can has Low Taxes?
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: I can has Low Taxes?

I suppose you aren’t familiar with the LDS Scripture called the Doctrine and Covenants section 132? I wonder why the LDS refuse to live the everlasting covenant?

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/132

3 Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.
4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.


4 posted on 11/11/2009 2:38:23 PM PST by colorcountry (A faith without truth is not true faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Gay rights legislation in Salt Lake City receives its first ever endorsement by the Mormon church.
__________________________________________

AHHHHHHHHH yes...

That deprtavity called polygamy cant be far off...

The slippery slope back to D&C 132...

Polygamy = godhood = mormon narvarna...


5 posted on 11/11/2009 5:40:17 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I can has Low Taxes?; el_texicano
The mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has disavowed polygamy for over a century.

The Lds church has never disavowed eternal polygamy [Lds message that their polygamists live in Kolob Heights, where they are "raising up seed"; plus Lds apostle Bruce McConkie said in his "Mormon Doctrine" book that the "holy practice" of earthly polygamy would be re-instituted when the Mormon jesus returns]

Also, time-wise note: The Lds church was still secretly "plural marrying" hundreds of couples from 1890-1910 -- some of whom were still alive in the early 1960s. (The Lds church rarely tried to break up these "plural unions" that were formed by 1910).

6 posted on 11/11/2009 7:10:24 PM PST by Colofornian (If you're not going to drink the coffee, at least wake up and smell it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana; All

In your hysterical need to attach the Mormon church, you all seem to be forgetting one key point: The church’s support of anti-discrimination laws in the workplace have ZILCH to do with supporting gay marriage which the LDS Church has been second to none in fighting against. These are 2 differing positions folks.

Watch how militant gays spit nails at the very mention of Mormons if you don’t believe the Mormon Church hasn’t been a driving force to oppose gay marriage and is continuing to be. They are public enemy number 1 to the pro-gay marriage crowd.

So that being the case, where do you all come up with this absurd domino theory that this will result in the return of polyagamy which was banned by the LDS Church by revelation? Did any of you even read the article? There’s NOTHING in it that suggests in any way that the LDS Church stand on gay marriage has in any way changed, indeed it is stated explicitly that this has not changed. Good gosh folks, slow down from the frenzy of Mormon bashing and take a breath to think a little bit about what you’re posting.


7 posted on 11/12/2009 8:34:00 AM PST by MissesBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
The Lds church has never disavowed eternal polygamy

So? If the LDS Church is a false church as you claim, then what they believe will happen in the eternies will be null and void and thus have no impact on you in the here and now or after this life. So why do you care what their beliefs about the afterlife are like when they do not violate secular laws now or in any way create an imposition on you or your moral sensibilites in this world?

Spend your time building up your own faith instead of trying to tear down the faith of others.

8 posted on 11/12/2009 8:40:56 AM PST by MissesBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush; Colofornian

MB said...

(You are) trying to tear down the faith of others.

If the LDS Church is a false church as you claim....

why do you care .....
___________________________________________

Yes, well on that note, MB...

Why do you care what colofornian has to say ???

You wouldnt be “trying to tear down the faith of others”, would you ???

Eh ????


9 posted on 11/12/2009 9:16:54 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush; Colofornian

C: The Lds church has never disavowed eternal polygamy

MB: So? If the LDS Church is a false church as you claim,
__________________________________________

MB, you got all that out of C just commenting that “the Lds have never disdisavowed eternal polygamy”

and they havent...

D&C 132 about “celestial marriage” was never rescinded...

Its still part of essential doctrine...

Joey Smith said it was a “new and everlasting covenant”

Since mormonism is based on polygamy, to get rid of it would be to get rid of mortmonism...

The mormon males have to practice polygamy in order to become gods and go to their afterlife...

The mormons claim that their mormon jesus will reinstate polygamy when he returns...

The mormons claim that their mormon jesus was married, and a polygamist...

D&C 132

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye dammed; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

glory.
5 For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.

6 And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fullness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fullness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.

21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.


10 posted on 11/12/2009 9:30:05 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
You wouldnt be “trying to tear down the faith of others”, would you ???

Eh ????

Please post for me a single syllable in either post I made where I attacked the religious beliefs or faith of others. You will find no such remarks, which cannot be said about your posts. So your comment above is a complete, mystifying non-sequitor with no anchor in anything I said.

Why do I care what Colofornian has to say? Because you all made laughably disconnected comments regarding the actual policy the LDS Church is pursuing in regard to workplace discrimination. It has nothing to do with marriage. You can disagree with the essence of the policy on "gay rights" all day long and I may just join you on that side of the debate. But there is NOTHING relevent to polygamy or marriage in this policy so it was just a gratuitous and lame attempt to take yet another swipe at the LDS Church. The disconnect in what you and he were saying was so yawning it needed to be commented on to bring you all back to reality.

Other than that, I don't care what he has to say which is why I will not read any reply he makes nor respond as has been my policy towards him and his obsessive bigotry against the Mormon religion for a while. I just thought this thread was such a howler because of several of the comments being such non-sequitors to the actual policy it begged being commented on.

I'm also done wasting my time with someone who AGAIN has tried to turn my argument against me--and failed miserably. Now report me to the mods as you always do when you don't like being disagreed with.

11 posted on 11/12/2009 9:34:17 AM PST by MissesBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

This is such a shocker to me.

And sad too.


12 posted on 11/12/2009 9:38:48 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
D&C 132 about “celestial marriage” was never rescinded...

Pssst, "celestial marriage" includes and for the LDS Church currently is ONLY marriage between one man, one woman. If the LDS Church believes in the eternities polgamy is practiced, how does that impact you? It doesn't. So yes, polygamy was rescinded in the 1890 Manifesto. Celestial marriage is not nor has it EVER been solely polygamy esp. since so few even when it was practiced were allowed to enter into such marriages, something like fewer than 15% of the men of the church.

Again, practice your faith. Leave the faith of others alone. You surely can build yourself and your beliefs without having to tear down the faith of others. In this era of unbridled wickedness in the world the struggle should not be the godly vs. godly. It should be the godly vs. the ungodly. Anything else is a waste of energy and I believe is exactly how Satan would like to distract us from fighting the real fight we should be having. It's the same divisive spirit that sets Sunnis against Shiites in places like Iraq.

When you have a 16 year old gang raped in Stockton, California as dozens just watched and did nothing to help, when you have a farm in Missouri dug up to uncover evidence of decades of child sexual abuse by the parents against their children, when you have a home in Cleveland filled to the rafters with dead bodies by a man who lured women in, assaulted them and murdered them, when you have a Muslim terrorist shooting up our heroes at Fort Hood and murdering and so many other realities of horrofic sin afoot in the world, I would hope it would awaken you to the fact you're fighting against the wrong people and wasting your energies against the wrong "enemy." This is why splitting hairs on what constitutes "celestial marriage" in Mormon doctrine or worrying about what Mormons think marriage is like in the next life is nothing but a grand distraction and frankly a ludicrious one in the face of the awful sin we're confronted with in the news and in our communities on a daily basis. For that reason, I'm going to put my energies into fighting that, not debating you. I will not read nor reply to further posts because I chose not to be distracted from the real fight we have at hand.

13 posted on 11/12/2009 9:50:37 AM PST by MissesBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

Pssst, “celestial marriage” includes and for the LDS Church currently is ONLY marriage between one man, one woman.

Celestial marriage is not nor has it EVER been solely polygamy

Leave the faith of others alone
__________________________________________________

Pssst, “celestial marriage” is includes and for the LDS Church currently is ONLY marriage between one man, many women.

Mormonism claims that one man one woman is prostitution and unBiblical...

D&C 132 was never rescinded...

Lots of mormons continued to practice it and still do...

The mormons claim that whentheir mormon jesus returns, they will be able to come out of the closet and practice polygamy again in the open...

Without polygamy, mormon males dont get to be gods and without godhood they cant go to the mormon afterlife and practicve polygamy forever ...

as for your comment “Leave the faith of others alone” will you also tell the mormons to leave Christians alone and stop knocking on our doors ???

I’m not the one sendoing out 60,000 “missionaries” to tell Chrsitians they believe an abomination...


14 posted on 11/12/2009 10:01:41 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

Please post for me a single syllable in either post I made where I attacked the religious beliefs or faith of others. You will find no such remarks, which cannot be said about your posts.
___________________________________________________

Nough said...


15 posted on 11/12/2009 10:03:15 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana; MissesBush
Mormonism claims that one man one woman is prostitution and unBiblical... - LIE

D&C 132 was never rescinded... - True

Lots of mormons continued to practice it and still do... - LIE

The mormons claim that whentheir mormon jesus returns, they will be able to come out of the closet and practice polygamy again in the open... - LIE

Without polygamy, mormon males dont get to be gods ... - LIE

“Leave the faith of others alone” will you also tell the mormons to leave Christians alone and stop knocking on our doors ???

Yeah, that's the same thing. NOT.

It's sad that this bitterness is apparently the only thing you have left in life, Nana.

Seriously, is there ANYTHING else you care about, other than bashing Mormons?

16 posted on 11/12/2009 10:06:06 AM PST by TChris ("Hello", the politician lied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

his obsessive bigotry against the Mormon religion
______________________________________________

Its the “obsessive bigotry of the Mormon religion” that causes 60,000 mormon missionaries to knock on the doors of Christians and tell them their belief in the Christian Jesus is wrong ..

Until you address that you appear to be disingenuous...


17 posted on 11/12/2009 10:12:08 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: MissesBush; Tennessee Nana; GigEmAg
Spend your time building up your own faith instead of trying to tear down the faith of others. [MB]

You make it sound like the Bible is all "rosy" about our call to warn others about false prophets & heresies. Sorry, but the Bible discusses some negative things in that regard. In fact, it says we're under obligation to warn others. (See the apostle Paul's warning, for example, in Acts 20)

Since our faith includes the need to warn others, and you oppose that, it sounds like you're tearing down my faith. (So I guess that means you need to heed your own warning: Spend your time building up your own faith instead of trying to tear down the faith of others. Since you apparently believe this as a personal standard...start living it...stop being negative toward me, then...spend your time building up your own faith. If this is your maxim, live it).

So why do you care what their beliefs about the afterlife are like when they do not violate secular laws now or in any way create an imposition on you or your moral sensibilites in this world? [MB]

Because we all have to answer to God one day -- including if we've loved our neighbor with the truth...or withheld it from them out of some misguided sense of shielding them from realities.

20 posted on 11/12/2009 11:50:23 AM PST by Colofornian (If you're not going to drink the coffee, at least wake up and smell it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush; Tennessee Nana
So why do you care what their beliefs about the afterlife are like when they do not violate secular laws now or in any way create an imposition on you or your moral sensibilites in this world?

If you're going to reference me in a post, please ping me. Otherwise, it amounts to gossiping behind my back. (Is that what you do in your private life?). Do you need remedial training for online etiquette?

21 posted on 11/12/2009 11:51:39 AM PST by Colofornian (If you're not going to drink the coffee, at least wake up and smell it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush; Tennessee Nana; GigEmAg
This is why splitting hairs on what constitutes "celestial marriage" in Mormon doctrine or worrying about what Mormons think marriage is like in the next life is nothing but a grand distraction and frankly a ludicrious one in the face of the awful sin we're confronted with in the news and in our communities on a daily basis.

If this is "splitting hairs", as you put it, then stop trying to split hairs on how relevant of an import this is.

Mitt Romney and I share at least one thing: We're both descendants of Mormon polygamists. Now when Mitt was on "60 Minutes" on May 9, 2007, what was his conclusion about it?

"I have a great-great grandfather. They were trying to build a generation out there in the desert and so he took additional wives as he was told to do. And I must admit, I can't imagine anything more awful than polygamy," he said. (Reuters, May 10, 2007) http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1018509620070510

Now that was a GOP POTUS MORMON candidate, circa 2007. He said he couldn't "imagine anything more awful than polygamy." Now, MB, you would think that things that are bottom-rung "awful" are going to rank to be of import, provocation-wise, right?

But at least in this case Mitt (for once) sounded more like our early-day fledgling Republicans, who in 1856 announced they were going to tackle the "twin relics of barbarism" -- polygamy and slavery.

We all need to understand that it wasn't just the need to take aim at something; rather, our Republican forefathers declared they saw the need to protect one-woman marriage.
That is what the still-existent threat of polygamy is.
That is what the ever-present threat of same-sex "marriage" is.

22 posted on 11/12/2009 11:55:52 AM PST by Colofornian (If you're not going to drink the coffee, at least wake up and smell it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GigEmAg
Homosexual marriage and homosexual sex they oppose in its entirety, regardless of the nature of the union and whether it is sanctioned by the state; however, that doesn’t mean these people who struggle with their own crosses to bear should be denied housing...

The apostle Paul still speaks to our consciences when he wrote under guidance of the Holy Spirit: "...do not share in the sins of others." (1 Timothy 5:22).

The issue is someone (a landlord, for example) who as you said opposes sex outside of marriage (be it hetero or homo-sexual lifestyles) being forced by penalty of law to participate in the sins of others.

Property management is a stewardship matter. A concientious property owner may attempt to honor the LORD in everything they do; and a landlord saying "no" to a cohabiting heterosexual couple is trying to conscientiously follow biblical passages like 1 Tim. 5:22.

In this sense, it's not much different than a father or mother saying to their 18 yo, 19 yo or 20-something adult kid, "No, you can't sleep with your boyfriend/girlfriend at our house. No, I'm not going to set up quarters for you and your cohabiting partner -- of whatever sex -- to live with us for a while. Why would you ask me to actively sanction your sexual relationship?"

In both cases above, the property owner is attempting to honor the Lord. If certain drugs became legal, like Breckrenridge, CO just passed a vote to allow marijuana smoking; and if a Breckrenridge property owner had a tenant who had marijuana parties every night, don't you think the landlord should have the right of association if their property is to be so used for that purpose?

I see no reason why gays should be denied housing or jobs just because they like people of the same sex.

How naive...you think it comes down to whether somebody else likes" somebody particular? Try on the following for size:
#1 So forcing a retailer to say, higher an open cross-dresser, meets your "anti-discrimination" campaign approval?

#2 Unfortunately, none of this ever is limited to homosexual behavior. These ordinances are usually based upon vague "sexual orientation" language. So, imagine being a business owner or workplace manager. Now sit down & write a long list of various "sexual orientations" -- and all of these so-called "what-they-do-in-the-privacy-of-their-own-homes" can be imposed into very public business. (For example, an exhibitionist could be deemed a "sexual orientation"...as public clothing codes start going by the wayside, good luck trying to pre-empt that "sexual orientation" in your place of work. Every "sexual orientation" under the sun becomes a protected class status)

#3 Likewise, imagine somebody applying at a child care agency or school or Lds seminary or Boy Scout group, saying that they have a "sexual orientation" toward children but they've never acted on it. No criminal record. No crimes have occurred. They say they're "clean" behaviorally. So, you're just suppose to conclude as either a church administrator or somebody considering hiring such a person that their "sexual orientation" is irrelevant?

Would YOU let such a person become a Cub Scout or Boy Scout leader?

What we fail to understand is that no matter how compassionate and accepting we want to be to the homosexual community, their public policy goals always seek to define morality for all. They impose their will upon others -- effectively telling them that people can no longer make any distinctions on sexual morality other than what is legal or illegal...and that changes according to how hard a given "sexual minority" lobbies lawmakers and accomplishes end runs thru the courts.

If you want your morality to be defined by the slogan "whatever is legal is moral," go for it.

23 posted on 11/12/2009 12:07:21 PM PST by Colofornian (If you're not going to drink the coffee, at least wake up and smell it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GigEmAg

The LDS church frowns on any sex outside the confines of the marriage institution. Homosexual marriage and homosexual sex they oppose in its entirety,
_______________________________________________

Welcome to FR, n00b...

While the mormons dont seem to object to homosexually any more....(Some tax exemption problem again)

The LDS only frowns ??? as in “tou have an option...”

The God of the Bible does more than frown upon all deviant sex...

God commands us not to commit the u8nclean sins of homosexually or polygamy AKA celestial marriage AKA spiritual marriage AKA a new and everlasting covenant AKA the first principal AKA adultry...

That’s a big difference between what the mormons claim their mormon gods told Joey Smith to do and the beliefs and practices about marriage of Judeo-Christianity...

With Chrsitianity there is no frowning or option...

Its Thou shalt not commit adultery..Genesis 20:14

God treats the sins of homosexually and polygamy equally...

You know that wicked people will not inherit the kingdom of God, don’t you? Stop deceiving yourselves! Sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, thieves, greedy people, drunks, slanderers, and robbers will not inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

The Morg might need to stop holding on to all those millions of tithe monies and start giving some of it to the poor...

Build a hospital in Africa people who cant pay them back with interest, or something...


24 posted on 11/12/2009 12:15:42 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
Sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, thieves, greedy people, drunks, slanderers, and robbers will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Good gawd. That leaves out everyone south of the Mason-Dixon.

25 posted on 11/12/2009 12:20:01 PM PST by MARTIAL MONK (I'm waiting for the POP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK

everyone south of the Mason-Dixon
_________________________________________________

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

The South was not part of Mexico like Utah was...

Ya know SOUTH OF THE BORDER ???

The reason the mormons left the US and went into Mexico (the Utah territory) was so that they could practice their unGodly unlawful lifestyles away from the justice of the US government or US army...

Gollies and that was suppose to last forever...

The US and the rest of the nations were suppose to become part of “Deseret” and embrace mormonism...

What hapened to the plans of the mormon god ??


26 posted on 11/12/2009 12:42:58 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK

Sometimes there are posts that claim the mormons were so called “victims” who had to run for their lives...

But nobody was chasing them ...

If they were they would have continued right to where BY had his property in Utah...

The wicked man flees though no one pursues, but the righteous are as bold as a lion. Proverbs 28:1


27 posted on 11/12/2009 12:48:20 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day SaintsStatement Given to Salt Lake City Council on Nondiscrimination Ordinances

SALT LAKE CITY 10 November 2009 The following statement representing the position of the Church’s leadership, was read by Michael Otterson, managing director of Church Public Affairs, as part of a public comment period discussing the ordinances at a Salt Lake City Council meeting 10 November 2009:

Good evening.

My name is Michael Otterson, and I am here tonight officially representing The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The nondiscrimination ordinances being reviewed by the city council concern important questions for the people of this community.

Like most of America, our community in Salt Lake City is comprised of citizens of different faiths and values, different races and cultures, different political views and divergent demographics. Across America and around the world, diverse communities such as ours are wrestling with complex social and moral questions. People often feel strongly about such issues. Sometimes they feel so strongly that the ways in which they relate to one another seem to strain the fabric of our society, especially where the interests of one group seem to collide with the interests of another.

The issues before you tonight are the right of people to have a roof over their heads and the right to work without being discriminated against. But, importantly, the ordinances also attempt to balance vital issues of religious freedom. In essence, the Church agrees with the approach which Mayor Becker is taking on this matter.

In drafting these ordinances, the city has granted common-sense rights that should be available to everyone, while safeguarding the crucial rights of religious organizations, for example, in their hiring of people whose lives are in harmony with their tenets, or when providing housing for their university students and others that preserve religious requirements.

The Church supports these ordinances because they are fair and reasonable and do not do violence to the institution of marriage. They are also entirely consistent with the Church’s *prior position on these matters. The Church remains unequivocally committed to defending the bedrock foundation of marriage between a man and a woman.

I represent a church that believes in human dignity, in treating others with respect even when we disagree – in fact, especially when we disagree. The Church’s past statements are on the public record for all to see. In these comments and in our actions, we try to follow what Jesus Christ taught. Our language will always be respectful and acknowledge those who differ, but will also be clear on matters that we feel are of great consequence to our society. Thank you.

*The Divine Institution of Marriage
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage

http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories/statement-given-to-salt-lake-city-council-on-nondiscrimination-ordinances


28 posted on 11/12/2009 7:12:13 PM PST by restornu (A humble people of the Lord is stronger than the all wicked warriors of the World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson